(CNSNews.com) – No sooner did the House of Representatives pass legislation designed to fight global warming by cutting so-called greenhouse gas emissions than the temperature around the nation's Capitol plummeted below seasonal norms, according to National Weather Service data.

At the same time, Congress adjourned and members left town, taking their red-hot rhetoric with them.

The global warming bill itself is not yet law and will not become law unless it passes the Senate and is signed by President Obama.

From June 27--the day the House passed the global warming bill--through July 5, the mean daily temperature in Washington D.C., averaged more than 4 degrees cooler than normal.

“That period (June 27 to July 5) is 4.1 degrees (Fahrenheit) below the normal for that period. It’s just calculating those days compared to the average for those days,” Brian Lasorsa, spokesman for the National Weather Service (NWS), told CNSNews.com on Monday.

“So the average for those days is 77.8 and the actual temperature averaged out for those days was 73.7, which gives you a difference of 4.1,” he added.

According to National Weather Service historical data for the nation’s capital, the biggest variation from the mean daily temperature during the period in question took place on July 5. On that day, the mean actual temperature was 69 degrees Fahrenheit while the historical mean temperature was 78. That is a 9-degree difference.

Alan Carlin, a 38-year research analyst at the Environmental Protection Agency, said the lower temperature readings constitute a “global temperature anomaly.”

Temperatures of individual states or districts do not pinpoint what is going on globally, he said, but indicated the lower temperatures in D.C. do seem to parallel an overall global temperature drop for the month of June.

“My view is that individual readings of individual cities or regions are not particularly indicative, but in the last few days there has been a release of data for June, this is satellite data on global temperature and it shows a drop,” Carlin told CNSNews.com.

Carlin based his observations off data from a chart of satellite readings crafted by the University of Alabama in Huntsville.

“Their data comes from satellites,” Carlin told CNSNews.com. “There are two general ways to gather this information--one is from satellites and one is from surface readings. It’s my view that the surface readings are extremely inaccurate.”

The Center for American Progress (CAP), a Washington D.C. liberal think tank, however, told CNSNews.com that lower temperatures through much of the nation do not mean that “global warming” is not a problem.

“NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) said that April was the fifth warmest April globally and it said that May was the fourth warmest May on record. So, I think the year to date, I think this is the fifth warmest January to May,” Joseph Romm, a scientist at CAP told CNSNews.com.

As far as the drop in temperatures for June in the United States goes, Romm said:

“The United States has certainly been warming in the past decade, but like any relatively small part of the world it can, its weather fluctuates even as the climate gets warmer. I think it’s pretty clear that we are headed towards much warmer temperatures in the near term globally.”

Nevertheless, according to the chart from which Carlin made his observations, “June 2009 saw another--albeit small--drop in the global average temperature anomaly.”

Carlin explained that right now we are at a “zero anomaly point” -- meaning there is little or no actual change currently compared to the period of 1979 to about 1996.

Based on the chart, he predicts the trend in temperatures in the next few years will continue to go downward.

In addition to the lower temperatures in Washington D.C., news reports indicate there were also cooler than normal temperatures recently in several regions in the U.S., as well as in places such as New Zealand and the Arctic.

National Weather Service data reveals that New York City experienced the coldest June since 1958. The Associated Press reported that in Los Angeles, Calif., June temperatures were “below normal.”

“June's average daily high in downtown Los Angeles was 74.5 degrees, five degrees below normal,” the AP reported on July 1.

In Chicago, the July 1 high of 65-degrees marked the chilliest open to a July since 1930 and was one of the three coolest July 1 readings on the books in 139 years of weather records, the Chicago Tribune reported.

In Cape Cod, Mass., the weather affected more than just beach losses.

“The gloomy cold weather has affected more than just beach traffic. Farmers are facing thousands of dollars in losses following a Cape and Islands June that felt more like April,” The Cape Cod Times reported on July 6.

In New Zealand, May was the coldest month with June trailing close.

“May was the coldest recorded in many parts of New Zealand and June was not far behind, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) climate scientist Georgina Griffiths said yesterday,” The New Zealand Herald reported on July 3.

Meanwhile, Joe D’Aleo, executive director and certified consultant meteorologist at the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project revealed: “Arctic temperature is still not above 0°C-- the latest date in fifty years of record keeping.”

Carlin, meanwhile, said he believes that the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 will not have much of an impact on the actual environment because there is not enough evidence that “warrants” it.

“My view is that the current scientific evidence that we have does not warrant taking any action at this time other than possibly doing the homework and the background research which would allow us to rapidly influence global climate if that should become necessary,” Carlin told CNSNews.com.

“It’s not necessary now and what’s being proposed would not have much effect in my opinion,” he added.

CNSNews.com reported on June 30 that the EPA did not publicly release a March report by Carlin that had raised questions about the validity of the agency's conclusions on global warming.